Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:132721

Court No. - 72

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24500 of 2024

Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Adarsh Srivastava,Reena Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Case No.2361 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No.460 of 2016, under Sections 147, 325 & 342 I.P.C., Police Station Gulaothi, District Bulandshahar, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar, in terms of compromise dated 02.04.2024.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant and opposite party no.2 have amicably settled the dispute out of Court in terms of compromise dated 02.04.2024. It is next submitted that the applicants filed 482 application No.2361 of 2024 before this Court to quash the proceedings as both the parties have amicably settled the dispute out of the court. This Court vide order dated 20.03.2024 directed the parties to appear before the court below for verification of compromise dated 02.04.2024 (Annexure 3 to the affidavit). The order dated 20.03.2024 is being quoted below:-

¶9

"1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State- opposite party no. 1.

¶10

2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the cognizance order dated 18.12.2017 as well as entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 460 of 2016, under Sections 147, 325, 342 I.P.C., Police Station Gulaothi, District Bulandshahr pending in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahr.

¶11

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant and the opposite party no. 2 as well as injured have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them, copy of the compromise deed dated 03.01.2024 has been annexed as Annexure-4 to the affidavit, wherein it has been

¶12

mentioned that opposite party no. 2 does not want to press the case. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings before the Court concerned and the same is not only sheer wastage of time of the Court but also abuse of process of law.

¶13

4. Learned AGA, however, submits that it is the concerned court, which has to verify the fact as to whether the parties have entered into compromise, hence the applicant may approach the concerned court and move an application with respect to compromise between the parties, which will be decided in accordance with law.

¶14

5. In view of the above, both the parties including the injured are directed to appear before the court concerned along with an application for verification of compromise deed so filed as well as a certified copy of this order within three weeks from today. It is expected that the trial court may fix a date for the verification of the compromise and after ensuring the presence of parties, pass an appropriate order with respect to the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from today. While passing the order verifying the compromise, the concerned court shall also record the statement of the parties as to whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not.

¶15

6. The court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicant to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

¶16

7.Till verification of compromise between the parties by the court concerned, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶17

8. With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of."

¶18

Pursuant to the said order dated 20.03.2024, the parties appeared before the court below and after due verification of the parties and contents of the compromise made between them, the court below vide order dated 02.04.2024 has passed the verification order. A copy of the same is annexed as Annexure 3 to the affidavit.

¶19

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the

¶20

applicant and opposite party no.2 have settled their private and civil dispute through compromise and as such opposite party no.2 do not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicant. Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicant and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.

¶21

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant and opposite party no.2 do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them. The matter has been mutually settled between the parties, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶22

Thus in view of the well settled principle of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matters of Krishnappa & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka; 2021 0 Supreme(SC) 529, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and Ors. vs. State of Gujarat and another; 2017 9 SCC 641, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana; 2003(4) SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Burea of Investigation and another; (2008) 9 Supreme Court Cases 677, Gian Singh Vs. Stated of Punjab; (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab and another; (2014) Supreme Today 642 , the proceeding of Case No.2361 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No.460 of 2016, under Sections 147, 325 & 342 I.P.C., Police Station Gulaothi, District Bulandshahar, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar, is hereby quashed.

¶23

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C is accordingly allowed .

¶24

Order Date :- 6.8.2025 SKD

¶25

Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pradeep Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases